SN54HC00-SP: SN54HC00-SP

Mark Harms

Part Number: SN54HC00-SP
Other Parts Discussed in Thread: SN54HC02-SP

Good morning,

I attempted to submit this yesterday but it was apparently unsuccessful...

We kindly ask you to confirm that for SN54HC02-SP there has been no change of processing, technology and foundry applied on the associated QML-V (5962-8404101VCA) parts since October 1988. JPL SEE testing performed in October 1988 is being used as justification for space flight.

No change of processing, technology, and foundry is defined as: the manufacturer has not changed the mask, foundry or production line and that all parts manufactured to date have been processed identically.

over 5 years ago

0 Wade Vonbergen over 5 years ago

TI__Guru 62930 points

Mark,
I will add this to the list that is being researched.
Regards,
Wade

0 Mark Harms over 5 years ago in reply to Wade Vonbergen

Prodigy 120 points

Wade,

Please do you have an update on this request?

Regards,

-Mark Harms

0 Wade Vonbergen over 5 years ago in reply to Mark Harms

TI__Guru 62930 points

Unfortunately no.
I suspect that nothing intentionally has occurred that would have been deemed to change form, fit or function of these devices.
This is true from a PCN search.
However, we are requesting some additional research from the fab.

Very likely minor changes have occurred within the fab since 1988, that potentially could alter the TID performance. This would be similar to variation due to normal processing.
Since this is not RHA material, the only concrete answer would be to subject the material to testing.
This will be true for all three devices requested.

I will update when I get additional feedback from the fab.

Regards,
Wade

0 Mark Harms over 5 years ago in reply to Wade Vonbergen

Prodigy 120 points

Wade,

Thanks for the update. I understand it is not RHA material. The referenced report used non-RHA devices. Please keep me posted.

Regards,
-Mark

0 Wade Vonbergen over 5 years ago in reply to Mark Harms

TI__Guru 62930 points

Mark,
just wanting to let you know that I am still awaiting feedback.
Regards,
Wade

0 Mark Harms over 5 years ago in reply to Wade Vonbergen

Prodigy 120 points

Wade,

Thanks for following up on this. It would be sincerely appreciated if this could be resolved in the next couple of days.

Regards,

-Mark Hrams

0 Wade Vonbergen over 5 years ago in reply to Mark Harms

TI__Guru 62930 points

Uncertain on what information I will get from the wafer fab. This question is not an easy one to answer as there are likely hundreds of small changes to the flow/process during this time period.
I am reasonably sure that none were perceived as major changes with respect to radiation performance. However, this is not a simple thing to quantify. The only true metric would be testing.
I have not seen the report you are referencing. Is it publicly available?
Regards,
Wade

0 Wade Vonbergen over 5 years ago in reply to Wade Vonbergen

TI__Guru 62930 points

Mark,
I did get feedback from the fab last night and this morning.
There has been no significant changes to the device processing since 2002 when it moved to SFAB.
Prior to 2002 in was in another wafer fabrication facility called FFAB. So, the old report would be for material from different fab.
This is true for all three devices.

If this answers your question, please click "Verify it as the answer"
Regards,
Wade

Logic

Logic forum

SN54HC00-SP: SN54HC00-SP